Mid-Range 1.2 GHz Retina MacBook CPU Shows Nice Speed Boost Over Low-End Model

[MrEcted]

Well at least you've got more sense than some on here.

And yet here you are wasting your life on a forum which features products you dislike and will never purchase. Where is the sense in that?

Why are anti-Apple people so emotionally invested in bashing Apple products at every opportunity? I see it everywhere. Just look at any blog post, review, reddit submission, YouTube video, etc which features an Apple product (or hell, just shows a picture of one) and I GUARANTEE you within the comments you'll see the whole Apple hate brigade frothing at the mouth. You almost never see the opposite. Is it because Apple products tend to attract a more mature crowd? Is it jealousy on the part of the anti-Apple sheep? I just don't get it.

 

[atechsnob]

This will replace my 13inch 2013 Air (Or I may keep it) and go along nicely with my 15inch 2014 rmbp. I don't use my iPad Air all that much so my thought is this will replace that mostly. Although I'm keeping that too lol

 

[ColdShadow]

Lol god awful weak cpu and huge compromise on usability and function by eliminating essential ports.
the only target market for this product is people who like some fashion accessory device just to update their facebook,type a letter and search google.yet they can do all that already on ipad with fraction of the asking price.
such a backward,underpowered and limited machine.

 

[Vanilla Face]

Lol god awful weak cpu and huge compromise on usability and function by eliminating essential ports.
the only target market for this product is people who like some fashion accessory device just to update their facebook,type a letter and search google.yet they can do all that already on ipad with fraction of the asking price.
such a backward,underpowered and limited machine.

Or its for people that would trade performance for portability, or people that have a desktop for their power needs. The 1.2ghz benches at close to what my 2011 Macbook Pro does. I expect that the 1.3ghz model will exceed my MBP. An iPad is not a substitution for a computer.

 

[Jayomat]

I'd wager that this thing is up to the task for what 90% of the entire computer user base uses computers for.

whohow easy there, there are a lot of professionals and researchers who need far more capable computers. Don't forget all the pc-gamers out there. I think you're way off the track.

You may be right when you only factor in people who use computer of that screen size though!

 

[ColdShadow]

Or its for people that would trade performance for portability, or people that have a desktop for their power needs. The 1.2ghz benches at close to what my 2011 Macbook Pro does. I expect that the 1.3ghz model will exceed my MBP. An iPad is not a substitution for a computer.

It's close to 2011 Macbook Air not Pro..you know this machine was supposed to be a successor to MacBook Air.the MacBook Air was the light-use,ideal second machine and this was supposed to upgrade it with improvements including Retina display,instead it's performance lacks 4 years behind of even MacBook Air..there is little argue about how limited the functionality will be with only one USB C port for charging..and a $80 price tag for a converter cable..

 

[John.B]

Why does this article keep calling it the "Retina Macbook" when the name is just "Macbook". Have you not visited apple.com?

You don't call the iPhone 6 the Retina iPhone 6, right?

When it was new, we called the iPhone 4 the Retina iPhone, to differentiate from what came before.

 

[Vanilla Face]

It's close to 2011 Macbook Air not Pro..you know this machine was supposed to be a successor to MacBook Air.the MacBook Air was the light-use,ideal second machine and this was supposed to upgrade it with improvements including Retina display,instead it's performance lacks 4 years behind of even MacBook Air..there is little argue about how limited the functionality will be with only one USB C port for charging..and a $80 price tag for a converter cable..

It seems you are confusing this article about the 1.2ghz model with a previous article that put the base model on par with the 2011 Air. The 1.2, as they are showing here, is close to my 2011 Pro. I use geekbench 3 and only scored marginally better than this with my MBP that has a SSD, i7, and 16gb of ram. It clearly isn't a successor to the Macbook Air as the Macbook Air line is still in production, was recently updated, and this was introduced under a different name. The brought back the MacBook which was previously discontinued. This benchmark of the 1.2ghz model actually puts it above the i5 2015 Macbook Air, so its not 4 years behind as you, for whatever reason, believe. I really don't see the issue with the USB-C port. I can't remember the last time I actually plugged something in. If you don't like it, don't get it, but making stuff up and being over dramatic in trying to put it down isn't constructive in the least.

 

[Vanilla Face]

Why does this article keep calling it the "Retina Macbook" when the name is just "Macbook". Have you not visited apple.com?

You don't call the iPhone 6 the Retina iPhone 6, right?

You could either call it the 2015 MacBook or the Retina MacBook. It's to distinguish it from the previous generation MacBooks.

 

[RockSpider]

But why do you care about its architecture or clock frequency, in the end it's the user experience what matters. It makes no sense to compare it to other laptops since it has a proprietary OS

What proprietary OS, it's OSX, it's worse than Windows for slowing down machines, but hey, I don't know about OSX.

 

[AlecZ]

Very nice machine.

Incoming: all the comments from people who are far from the target of this laptop.

Who IS the target of this laptop? People who want a rMBP that's 1" smaller diagonally than what Apple currently offers or a MBA but 1" larger and retina? Seems like almost everyone should just buy a 13" rMBP or 11" or 13" MBA instead of the MacBook.

 

[RockSpider]

And yet here you are wasting your life on a forum which features products you dislike and will never purchase. Where is the sense in that?

Why are anti-Apple people so emotionally invested in bashing Apple products at every opportunity? I see it everywhere. Just look at any blog post, review, reddit submission, YouTube video, etc which features an Apple product (or hell, just shows a picture of one) and I GUARANTEE you within the comments you'll see the whole Apple hate brigade frothing at the mouth. You almost never see the opposite. Is it because Apple products tend to attract a more mature crowd? Is it jealousy on the part of the anti-Apple sheep? I just don't get it.

I can assure you I would never be jealous of the Apple crowd, you have absolutely nothing I would want.
The only thing I feel is amazement at how a single money hungry company can delude so many people. But then again, these people aren't really into tech just fashion statements, as you can see by the watch.

 

[AlecZ]

Why are anti-Apple people so emotionally invested in bashing Apple products at every opportunity? I see it everywhere. Just look at any blog post, review, reddit submission, YouTube video, etc which features an Apple product (or hell, just shows a picture of one) and I GUARANTEE you within the comments you'll see the whole Apple hate brigade frothing at the mouth. You almost never see the opposite. Is it because Apple products tend to attract a more mature crowd? Is it jealousy on the part of the anti-Apple sheep? I just don't get it.

I don't think Apple products attract a more mature crowd. It's that a lot of people find pride in hating on them just because they happen to use something different. I've heard the phrase "I almost feel guilty switching to [Mac or iPhone]" before.

Here in college, the big debate in CS classes is always whether to use something Linux-based on a Thinkpad or get a MacBook Pro. The sensible people decide whether the extra cost of the Mac is worth it. And then there's plenty of nonsense like "OS X is too closed, so it's bad" (even used when comparing it to Windows, which is plain false) and "OS X IS NOT FREE AS IN FREEDOM, SO YOU SHOULDN'T USE IT!!!" (true that it's not open-source, but who cares?). The argument for using OS X is that you shouldn't waste your time fiddling with junk in Linux on a PC if you can help it.

 

[nando87]

What proprietary OS, it's OSX, it's worse than Windows for slowing down machines, but hey, I don't know about OSX.

Well, if you say it

 

[MrEcted]

I can assure you I would never be jealous of the Apple crowd, you have absolutely nothing I would want.
The only thing I feel is amazement at how a single money hungry company can delude so many people. But then again, these people aren't really into tech just fashion statements, as you can see by the watch.

You been to Silicon Valley before? I have, I work in software, MacBook Pros EVERYWHERE! Basically all of Google uses Mac, Facebook, and much more. Macs are very popular in the software world because OS X is based on Unix, which means they are POSIX compliant and things like Bash, Vim, Emacs, gcc, etc come baked in. Also, moving between OS X and Linux feels much more natural than moving between Windows and Linux. You are generalizing an entire group based on some caricature you've built in your head which was influenced by fellow Apple haters.

In any case, let's visit la-la-land for a minute and assume you're correct. All people who buy Macs do such because they want to appear fashionable. I have no idea why you care. You care enough to waste your life hating on these products. You care enough to actually register for websites and forums that feature these products you hate, for the express purpose of spending your life hating on these products. I find that far more pathetic than someone who wants to buy a product because they find it functional and fashionable. Do you sign up for Gucci forums so you can hate on those people too? Do you sit around questioning all of their decisions because they can buy cheaper shoes at Walmart?

 

[RockSpider]

You been to Silicon Valley before? I have, I work in software, MacBook Pros EVERYWHERE! Basically all of Google uses Mac, Facebook, and much more. Macs are very popular in the software world because OS X is based on Unix, which means they are POSIX compliant and things like Bash, Vim, Emacs, gcc, etc come baked in. Also, moving between OS X and Linux feels much more natural than moving between Windows and Linux. You are generalizing an entire group based on some caricature you've built in your head which was influenced by fellow Apple haters.

In any case, let's visit la-la-land for a minute and assume you're correct. All people who buy Macs do such because they want to appear fashionable. I have no idea why you care. You care enough to waste your life hating on these products. You care enough to actually register for websites and forums that feature these products you hate, for the express purpose of spending your life hating on these products. I find that far more pathetic than someone who wants to buy a product because they find it functional and fashionable. Do you sign up for Gucci forums so you can hate on those people too? Do you sit around questioning all of their decisions because they can buy cheaper shoes at Walmart?

I own a Core i7 Mac Mini, in the two years I've owned it, it's slowed down significantly since updating to Yosemite and subsequent upgrades. I can't imagine too many Mac users using Linux.
I don't have a problem with all Macs just the ones that are ridiculously overpriced and underpowered. I don't even have a problem with all Apple users, just the ones who constantly keep praising Apple no matter what they do or what crap they bring out.
If you go to Microsoft forums or Android forums people will berate these companies if they do something wrong, with a lot of Apple lovers they just gloss it over.
In my opinion it's why Apple is so expensive and brings out such mediocre products lately, they don't have to try to hard to please the followers.
Just imagine what Apple could do if people were up in arms over some some of the latest missteps.
I won't even bring up how many times a day Safari crashes on my iPad Air.
Oh, have you seen what happens on here when someone complains about their Mac or iPad because it's playing up, the fanboys berate them and tell them they're just a hater.

 

[D.T.]

You been to Silicon Valley before? I have, I work in software, MacBook Pros EVERYWHERE! Basically all of Google uses Mac, Facebook, and much more. Macs are very popular in the software world because OS X is based on Unix, which means they are POSIX compliant and things like Bash, Vim, Emacs, gcc, etc come baked in. Also, moving between OS X and Linux feels much more natural than moving between Windows and Linux. You are generalizing an entire group based on some caricature you've built in your head which was influenced by fellow Apple haters.

Funny, I recently posted this in a thread in the community area:

For the most part, I'm not on internet sites where my equipment is really a concern, question, or where there's too much bad mojo. On dev sites, real developers know the value of a Mac - just pop into a good shop anywhere in the world and you'll see rows of Macs.

I was just in SF, and we used a nice work site to pound away at the prototype all day, pretty big joint - about 85% Macs. Many of these folks weren't sitting around surfing the net, they were writing badass apps, coding in Obj-C, Node, Rails - and in our case, writing C++ and doing 3D VR design.

FWIW, post continues in thread: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1865813/]

 

[Peter Maurer]

Seems like almost everyone should just buy a 13" rMBP or 11" or 13" MBA instead of the MacBook.

As mentioned earlier, I wouldn't buy a laptop without a retina display anymore. The 13" rMBP with 8 GB RAM + 512 GB SSD, on the other hand, is significantly more expensive than the rMB with 8 GB RAM + 512 GB SSD.

I'm exchanging CPU power + ports I don't need for less weight + smaller form factor + 200 Euros. Is it really so hard to understand that that's a reasonable deal for a lot of people?

(As a fellow developer, I have a top-of-the-line 15" rMBP to deal with the Xcode heavy lifting. Actually, a lot of people on this thread seem to buy the rMB as a secondary Mac. But you and I both know that the rMB is a perfectly capable development machine as well. Most developers I know don't spend most of their days compiling their code over and over again.)

 

[AlecZ]

As mentioned earlier, I wouldn't buy a laptop without a retina display anymore. The 13" rMBP with 8 GB RAM + 512 GB SSD, on the other hand, is significantly more expensive than the rMB with 8 GB RAM + 512 GB SSD.

I'm exchanging CPU power + ports I don't need for less weight + smaller form factor + 200 Euros. Is it really so hard to understand that that's a reasonable deal for a lot of people?

They're both $1,300 entry-level. Generally, the rMB is not any cheaper... Unless you specifically want a 512GB SSD. Yes, for some reason, you can't configure the rMBP to have a 512GB SSD. You have to get the high-end one for that (which has a faster processor), and it ends up costing more than if you configure the rMB to have a 512GB SSD. That's a pretty special case. Also, what would you need a 512GB SSD for instead of 256GB or 128GB if you're supposed to be one of the targeted users?

 

[Peter Maurer]

We don't know what the 512GB SSD costs on the rMB vs rMBP... If it were cheaper, that would definitely be a reason to buy it.

Well, we know what the models with 512 GB SSDs cost — here, I've looked it up on the US Apple Store for you:

- rMB: $1,599.00
- 13" rMBP: $1,799.00

(That's without sales tax. Over here in Germany, the prices are the same numbers in Euros, including sales tax.)

Neither of them has an SSD upgrade path for the cheaper models, so these are the two choices you're looking at if a 256 GB SSD isn't enough for you.

--

EDIT: Oops, your post is very different now from what it was originally. Why do I need the 512 GB SSD? There are things I like to have available locally (work-related stuff, as well as music and other media), and if I add up all of those, I'm above 256 GB.

 

[AlecZ]

You been to Silicon Valley before? I have, I work in software, MacBook Pros EVERYWHERE! Basically all of Google uses Mac, Facebook, and much more. Macs are very popular in the software world because OS X is based on Unix, which means they are POSIX compliant and things like Bash, Vim, Emacs, gcc, etc come baked in. Also, moving between OS X and Linux feels much more natural than moving between Windows and Linux.

Yep, OS X is the best for programming. I wanted to toss my friend's Windows Dell out the window after I spent like 30 minutes trying to figure out why he couldn't run some tests for his Java project on it, only to realize it was because of that "\r\n" line ending blasphemy in Windows.

----------

Well, we know what the models with 512 GB SSDs cost — here, I've looked it up on the US Apple Store for you:

- rMB: $1,599.00
- 13" rMBP: $1,799.00

(That's without sales tax. Over here in Germany, the prices are the same numbers in Euros, including sales tax.)

Neither of them has an SSD upgrade path for the cheaper models, so these are the two choices you're looking at if a 256 GB SSD isn't enough for you.

--

EDIT: Oops, your post is very different now from what it was originally. Why do I need the 512 GB SSD? There are things I like to have available locally (work-related stuff, as well as music and other media), and if I add up all of those, I'm above 512 GB.

My mistake, I totally forgot Apple had the MB already on their site and posted the wrong thing at first.

 

[Peter Maurer]

My mistake, I totally forgot Apple had the MB already on their site and posted the wrong thing at first.

No problem. You helped me spot a typo in return. I meant to say I'm above 256 GB with all the stuff I like to have available locally. (Not a fan of relying on cloud solutions for private and/or sensitive data.)

--

EDIT: I don't think requiring more than 256 GB for your SSD is that much of a special case, by the way. My Photos library alone, for example, is >100 GB, and I'm not exactly an ardent photographer. Also, people with kids tend to record a lot of videos, and those add up fast.

 

[iSunrise]

Very good Anandtech-Review of the new Macbook that sums it up pretty well:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9136/the-2015-macbook-review

Verdict:
Even with lower workloads the battery-life suffered a lot compared to the MBA. 8 hours vs. 12 hours. And 8 hours is really not that much if you want a no-compromise mobile laptop even for lighter use. I am not sure what Apple thought here, but this doesn't seem an OK compromise.

And while the MSRP of the base model is already at $1299, higher models are WAY too expensive for the little gain, which will also deplete your battery a lot faster.

For me personally, it feels like a kinda-downgrade (even though the WAY better display is 16:10 now, which i love). I am not satisfied with the end-result at all.

 

[ssmoot]

So I got mine yesterday (1.2GHz).

It's about half the speed of my 2012 iMac (i7, 3.4GHz) when compiling just under 500 Scala sources in a Play Framework application while running IDEA, iTerm, SBT, Safari, Mail, Slack. Just the usual stuff.

61s for the iMac. 121s for the MB with a full clean (rm -rf a Maven target basically) & compile.

So I'm pretty happy about that. Keeping in mind a full clean & compile is rare. It's usual incremental compilation, where it's reliably under 30s. Slower than I'd like. But that's mostly the Scala compiler for you. I'd go so far as to suggest that if you're using Java this is a pretty ideal laptop. And if you're using Ruby/Python/PHP, this thing will smoke whatever you can throw at it.

The screen is bigger and nicer than I expected. The new aspect-ratio is a HUGE improvement over the MBA 11". Honestly, in a straight up comparison between the two, I don't see any reason to even consider the MBA 11" unless you're very cost conscious and buying refurb.

The speakers are very loud. The USB-Type-C: Not as nice as Lightning. It's a chunky, stubborn cable and the plug is very grabby. But not in a nice "snick" way like a Lightning cable. In a ****** MicroUSB sort of way. With the same feeling that the depth of the plug is going to result in a lot of bent/broken plugs over time. I'll live. But it could've been better.

 

[kamapuaa]

Machine should work fine.

I have a $200 HP netbook that runs the Core M processor and it's fine for my job, for web browsing, for teleconferencing, for watching videos, for really anything I could want except games. The only problem is the screen kind of sucks and that it runs Windows 8.1, which obviously shouldn't be a problem with the Macbook.

Complaints about "it's not worth it" are such BS. We're all using Mac products, we're used to paying more for our computers. If the $/performance metric was so important, we'd use Windows. And I doubt 10% of Macbook Pro users *ever* use their computer for something that the Macbook won't be able to handle, aside from games - do people really edit videos on their laptops?